A recent decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware addressed a federal statute that allows, under certain circumstances, discovery in a U.S. federal court to aid a lawsuit pending in another country, in the matter styled: In re Application of Vestolit Gmbh and Celanese Europe B.V., Misc. No. 24-cv-1401-CFC

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision is noteworthy for several key principles applied to a set of facts that involve company counsel using corporate machinery and corporate funds to join with a faction of the board to oust a board member. Dalby v. Kastner, C.A. No. 2025-0136-NAC (Del. Ch. Aug. 29, 2025), is

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision explained why a lack of candor resulted in discovery abuses that justified fee-shifting. In Legent Group, LLC v. Axos Financial, Inc., C.A. No. 2020-0405-KSJ (Del. Ch. Nov. 7, 2025), the court explained the factual basis for its findings that the lack of candor created unnecessary expenses, requiring

In a recent bench ruling, the Delaware Court of Chancery addressed an issue that it acknowledged had not been squarely decided by the court in a prior published decision: corporate counsel’s role and scope of engagement for a two-member deadlocked board. In Kundrun v. AMCI Group, LLC, C.A. No. 2025-0570-LM-VCL (Del. Ch. Oct. 22

I’m attending today a symposium hosted by the above center at the University of Delaware, organized by the center’s head, Prof. Larry Cunningham. The title is: “Boardroom Legacy: Weinbergs of Goldman Sachs & The Evolution of Courtroom Governance”.

The impetus of the convocation is the 1948 Princeton senior paper of John Weinberg, that has never

Recent developments in AI allow for summaries of court decisions without the need, in theory, for much human input. So, what is the usefulness of blogs by lawyers (such as this one–now in its 20th year) that cover a particular legal topic if AI can do so much of the work? The answer is: insights